While it can be seen morally questionable to cut down tax payments as much as legally possible, most business are doing it, because if not, you´re
obviously loosing money. That would be stupid from a commercial view. Then I don´t know how it´s handled in the USA, but here, you can pull plenty
of tax returns if you know what you do and know the law. All legally, and no one is questioning it here.

Maybe I´m missing something that is not present/relevant in my country. The point is, no one wants to hand out free money to the government. The
whole point of tax returns is, that you get back, what you´ve already paid. It´s your right.

I told you before, this was never about how much Trumpy does or doesn't pay in taxes. It's about where he gets his money and who he owes, and if his
financial ties prevent him from governing in the best interest of the American people, because he's too busy paying his debtors in the way of
political favors or lining his and his family's pockets.

I told you before, this was never about how much Trumpy does or doesn't pay in taxes. It's about where he gets his money and who he owes, and if his
financial ties prevent him from governing in the best interest of the American people, because he's too busy paying his debtors in the way of
political favors or lining his and his family's pockets.

Actually there were several anti-Trumpers claiming he was not really rich and paid no taxes. Now that has been dispelled and we know he paid more than
Obama and also "1%" Bernie, you're on to the next conspiracy theory.

You better be careful or you will end up crazy and humiliated like Maddow.

You do realise that all his creditors have already been submitted with all his businesses revenue as part of his campaign, right? Do you also realise
that you are not entitled to see his tax returns and that there is an investigation going on into any collusion..?... by people actually qualified to
do an investigation as opposed to an ant-Trumper trawling through tax returns and concluding that 1+1=3.

Conservative columnist George Will said on Fox News earlier this week that one of the reasons Trump may be refusing to release his tax returns is
that they may show "he is deeply involved in dealing with Russian oligarchs."
......
For instance, if Trump claims tax credits for taxes paid to foreign governments, he'd have to reveal the countries where he paid those taxes.
Or you might see if he has any bank accounts in Russia or other countries where Russians like to keep their money.
"Russians like Cyprus. If he's buds with Putin, maybe he keeps some money in Cyprus," said Martin Sullivan, a Tax Analysts contributing editor.
The U.S. government requires filers to disclose money held in foreign bank accounts, or face harsh penalties.

If the public saw Trump's taxes, we could check his Russia connections for ourselves. That should start with the troubling discrepancies in how he
and his closest associates talk about his Russia ties. Trump has claimed, for example, that “the reason they blame Russia [for hacking into
Democratic emails] is they are trying to tarnish me with Russia. I know about Russia, but not about the inner workings. I have no business there and
no loans from Russia. I have a great balance sheet.” But that’s very different from the claims that the Trump Organization was making before he
decided to run for president. Trump's son said in 2008 that “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross section of a lot of our assets” and
“we see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”

Conservative columnist George Will said on Fox News earlier this week that one of the reasons Trump may be refusing to release his tax returns is
that they may show "he is deeply involved in dealing with Russian oligarchs."
......
For instance, if Trump claims tax credits for taxes paid to foreign governments, he'd have to reveal the countries where he paid those taxes.
Or you might see if he has any bank accounts in Russia or other countries where Russians like to keep their money.
"Russians like Cyprus. If he's buds with Putin, maybe he keeps some money in Cyprus," said Martin Sullivan, a Tax Analysts contributing editor.
The U.S. government requires filers to disclose money held in foreign bank accounts, or face harsh penalties.

If the public saw Trump's taxes, we could check his Russia connections for ourselves. That should start with the troubling discrepancies in how he
and his closest associates talk about his Russia ties. Trump has claimed, for example, that “the reason they blame Russia [for hacking into
Democratic emails] is they are trying to tarnish me with Russia. I know about Russia, but not about the inner workings. I have no business there and
no loans from Russia. I have a great balance sheet.” But that’s very different from the claims that the Trump Organization was making before he
decided to run for president. Trump's son said in 2008 that “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross section of a lot of our assets” and
“we see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”

Now, what is more important is what value you think you can add to any investigation on Trumps alleged collusion with Russia? Maybe you need to spell
out what you can offer and get in touch with the FBI?

I say this because it is already established without doubt that Trump does not need to provide his returns to you AND it was unimportant to his
election. This we know, as he is sitting in the Oval Office.

My guess is that you have no valid reason for seeing his returns and zero to add to any investigation.

Maybe you need to spell out what you can offer and get in touch with the FBI?

No, I'm not going to spell any more out for you and I refuse to go back to Square One and keep relitigating this with you, again and again, repeating
myself over and over.

My guess is that you have no valid reason for seeing his returns and zero to add to any investigation.

This isn't about me. This is about the voices of millions and millions of American's demanding a proper investigation into Trump's ties with Russia.
I personally couldn't read Trump's tax returns even if I had them right in front of me. I would need a tax attorney to explain everything, and their
implications to me.

That's why we need a special prosecutor to oversee the investigation into ALL the pieces of this puzzle, and subpoena Trump 's recent tax returns in
the process.

Maybe you need to spell out what you can offer and get in touch with the FBI?

No, I'm not going to spell any more out for you and I refuse to go back to Square One and keep relitigating this you, again and again, repeating
myself over and over.

My guess is that you have no valid reason for seeing his returns and zero to add to any investigation.

This isn't about me. This is about the voices of millions and millions of American's demanding a proper investigation into Trump's ties with Russia.
I personally couldn't read Trump's tax returns even if I had them right in front of me. I would need a tax attorney to explain everything, and their
implications to me. That's why we need a special prosecutor to oversee the investigation into ALL the pieces of this puzzle, and subpoena Trump 's
recent tax returns in the process.

The voices of millions and millions of Americans were heard on the 8th November and Trump sits in the Oval Office. Now I can see why people may have
demanded the returns before the election in order to make a choice, but unfortunately for you enough said it did not matter to them.

There is no reason to see them now, except the investigative team to determine whether there was or is any collusion to influence the election. No
other information is interesting as Russian business dealings in the past have zero bearing on the President right now. So, can you help the
investigative team or not? Give them a buzz.

There is the added, rather obvious, point that Trump has already detailed line by line all his income and holdings and all his creditors and all
his positions in every company he owns and it has been available from the day he announced he was running.

You seem to think that if he lied on those he would be honest with his tax returns, providing the US govt with two separate sets of numbers. You must
really think you are going to get some great revelation . You've listened to Maddow too much, my friend.

Many, many legal experts disagree with you, and you arguing with me over the internet changes nothing. There will continue to be investigations on
this, and eventually, Trump will have to answer to the charges.

Like I said, this is only beginning. The charges are piling up against Trump and impeachment looks to be a likely outcome.

Many, many legal experts disagree with you, and you arguing with me over the internet changes nothing. There will continue to be investigations on
this, and eventually, Trump will have to answer to the charges.

Like I said, this is only beginning. The charges are piling up against Trump and impeachment looks to be a likely outcome.

No legal expert agrees with you. The law is that Trump does not need to show you his tax returns. You, or anyone else, arguing that it is valuable
for you to see his tax returns will not change the law.

Like I said, all his dealings have been disclosed according with FEC rules, so what you are hoping to find is baffling, unless you actually think he
is going to lie on his FEC filing whilst knowing the IRS have his tax returns????

What a silly retort! No legal experts have spoken with me. As I told you before, I agree with the many, many legal experts claiming that there is
sufficient evidence against Trump to call for a proper investigation to be overseen by a special prosecutor, so that all these piecemealed pieces of
evidence can be examined in context and timeline.

Like I said, all his dealings have been disclosed according with FEC rules, so what you are hoping to find is baffling, unless you actually think he
is going to lie on his FEC filing whilst knowing the IRS have his tax returns????

The financial disclosure comes with two big disclaimers — these are Trump’s self-reported figures, and the FEC requires the candidates to
report only in ranges, with “over $50 million” being the highest range. www.politico.com...

What a silly retort! No legal experts have spoken with me. As I told you before, I agree with the many, many legal experts claiming that there is
sufficient evidence against Trump to call for a proper investigation to be overseen by a special prosecutor, so that all these piecemealed pieces of
evidence can be examined in context and timeline.

Like I said, all his dealings have been disclosed according with FEC rules, so what you are hoping to find is baffling, unless you actually think he
is going to lie on his FEC filing whilst knowing the IRS have his tax returns????

The financial disclosure comes with two big disclaimers — these are Trump’s self-reported figures, and the FEC requires the candidates to
report only in ranges, with “over $50 million” being the highest range. www.politico.com...

Not so silly as it's a fact that no legal experts agree with your view that Trump must release his tax returns.
People would like him to, but the law is not on their side.

If the FEC is investigating, perhaps you could offer THEM your services? Make a pitch to them.
However, i must warn you that the FEC article actually relates to Super PAC coordination and is from last November. It does not relate to any Russian
collusion in the election OR indeed Trumps FEC filing in 2015 where he listed all his income, liabilities and business interests.
There is also this from the article:

While the notice from the FEC doesn’t necessarily implicate Trump’s campaign in illegal activity, it does demand Trump refund any donations
over the legal limit within 60 days

I fail to see why this should mean he was legally obliged to show you his tax returns

Face it, you have no valid reason whatsoever to review Trump's tax returns. Any investigation is best left to the experts and not with amateurs like
yourself or Racheal Maddow.

The "legal aspects" of a proper investigation into Trump's Russian ties and the appointment of a special prosecutor to evaluate the EVIDENCE. I
suggested that that investigative committee should/would subpoena Trump's recent tax records.

The "legal aspects" of a proper investigation into Trump's Russian ties and the appointment of a special prosecutor to evaluate the EVIDENCE. I
suggested that that investigative committee should/would subpoena Trump's recent tax records.

The investigation is different to you seeing his tax returns.

I don't disagree that the investigation could and probably should subpoena Trump's tax records, but what has that got to do with you seeing them, or
Racheal Maddow for that matter?

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.